But Big Tobacco — the global tobacco industry — remains powerful and massively resourced, with budgets for strategising and countering health measures that dwarf the resources available even to governments seeking to reduce smoking. Once it became clear that there was bipartisan support for measures such as regular tax increases and plain packaging, it would have been remarkable if the global tobacco companies that dominate the Australian market had not from the outset been determined to develop and implement strategies to undermine these approaches.

The history of tobacco control in Australia and internationally also shows that there is never room for complacency. While new approaches may have immediate impact, these must be complemented by continuing action and further evolving measures over time, otherwise the momentum will be lost. Experience shows that when complacency sets in, encouraging trends can be interrupted unless existing approaches are further invigorated and new approaches implemented. When tobacco advertising was banned in the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was a sense that the task had been done, and some momentum was lost — until this was recognised by the federal government of the day, which introduced the first National Tobacco Campaign, and restored encouraging trends in smoking prevalence. Similarly, in the late 1990s Australia’s pioneering tobacco control leader, Dr Nigel Gray, drew attention to ways in which “the resilient and resourceful tobacco industry has responded to tobacco control”, expressing concern about complacency and the need for further action in an MJA editorial entitled: Smoking — time to ring the alarm bells again.

The global international tobacco industry is like the ancient Greek Hydra, the monster that is a nest of nine snake-heads. Cut one off and the others spring into action while the first one regrows itself. Despite tax increases, graphic health warnings and plain packaging, tobacco companies in Australia are still managing to find ways to reassure smokers and keep tobacco products affordable and attractive to young people. Here are some of the ways they are achieving their aims — all cause to ring the alarm bells once more.

Strategy 1: produce and promote multiple new low price products

Since major tax rises starting in April 2010, tobacco companies have greatly increased the number of products available for sale in the budget range.

Many of these feature concepts of value in the product name, for instance Just Smokes, JPS Eternal Red, Endless Blue and Abundant Gold. Such products have been increasingly promoted on retail price boards in favour of other more traditionally popular brands (Bayly M, Scollo M, Lindorff K, et al. Tobacco price boards as a promotional strategy — a longitudinal observational study in Australian retailers. Submitted for publication.). While no data are collected by governments about product type, tobacco company reports to shareholders suggest that the sales of value brands now make up more than 50% of the market.

Strategy 2: confuse price signals to consumers with bulk deals to keep heavy smokers continuing to smoke as much as possible and by producing odd-numbered cigarette pack sizes

Cigarettes in Australia are now available not just in packs of multiples of five or ten (ie, 20, 30, 40 and 50 sticks). Brands are now selling in packs of 21, 22, 23, 26 and even recently, 43 and 44. After the most recent tax increase, for instance, British American Tobacco repackaged its popular Dunhill brand from 25 to 23 cigarettes, ensuring that the up-front purchase price remained the same, despite the 12.5% tax increase. These odd pack sizes make it very difficult for the consumer to calculate the price per stick, providing effective interference to what would otherwise be clear price signals after every tax increase.

Until 2010, most RYO tobacco pouches in Australia were sold in packs of 50 g. Since then, manufacturers have experimented with increasingly smaller pouch sizes of 40, 30 and then 25 g. Most recently, they have produced even smaller, attractively sized packs containing only 20 g of tobacco and retailing for substantially less than the most popular brand of cigarettes. There is no minimum size required for RYO products sold in Australia, and “sample packs” of 10 g have recently been noted for sale on Australian tobacco retailing websites.

Even when smokers buy large cigarette packs that are cheaper per stick, the price of a single cigarette made with RYO tobacco has risen much less steeply over time than the price of the cheapest factory-made cigarette.

Strategy 4: use and encourage price boards at point of sale to promote attractive prices, new products and novel brand names

Price boards at point of sale enable direct advertising of brand names in locations where all consumers will be exposed, and have become an important promotional opportunity for tobacco companies and retailers. They enable the companies to headline new products, and to draw attention to “value” and “budget” brands and novel brand names that entail reassurance-based marketing, with terms such as “natural”, flavours such as menthol and new RYO products.

One of the objectives of plain packaging legislation in Australia was to reduce the ability of tobacco companies to mislead consumers about the relative harms of different products. While use of colours on packs is no longer permitted, the legislation does not extend to the brand name or variant names of the product itself. The use of colour naming (e.g. Winfield White) and sensory naming (e.g. Peter Jackson Smooth Blue) sustain the notion that lighter colours and less harsh cigarettes indicate lower tar and, thereby, falsely imply lower levels of harm. Consumer misperceptions of reduced harm are reinforced by the tiny holes in cigarette filters, which mix air with inhaled tobacco smoke to provide the sensation of lighter and less harmful smoke. But it’s all a smokescreen: all cigarettes are deadly.

RYO tobacco products on the market in Australia similarly include Manitou Organic and names that highlight the features of the tobacco plant itself; for instance, Winfield Kingleaf and Bond Street Kingleaf. Industry positioning of RYO tobacco as “organic” is reinforced by brand names of rolling paper, such as Venti Earth and Raw Organic papers, OCB “100% natural, 100% vegetarian – Natural Arabic Gum” papers and brand names of filter tips such as RAW 100% SLIM Cotton Filters.

Strategy 8: market products that distract from harms with “fresh” menthol and other flavours and scents

The most popular brands of cigarettes in Australia have introduced novelty products that provide a new twist on the menthol variant. Capsules containing menthol have been placed in the filter, providing smokers with a “hit” of menthol when the filter is squeezed. Products such as JPS Ice, Peter Jackson Hybrid Blue Regular to Fresh and Winfield Optimum Sky Blue Crush compete for the attention of potential new smokers.

Tobacco companies also appear to be experimenting with flavour infusions and scents. The recently introduced Winfield Optimum Crush Summer Rush not only continues the competition for the number of superlative connotations in a single product name but also smells like lime. The Philip Morris cigarette brand variants introduced onto the market in 2016 – Longbeach Moments North Coast, West Coast and East Coast – reinforce the idea of “taking a moment for yourself” with “woody” and other aromas suggestive of appealing locations. Moreover, recently introduced RYO products sold in 10 g sample packs and retailing for half the cost of a typical pack of cigarettes are flavoured with banana, apple, caramel and chocolate.

There is currently no national legislation that allows the Australian Government to ban tobacco products blatantly attractive to young people.

Strategy 9: engage in aggressive lobbying, public relations activity and litigation to oppose and undermine evidence-based measures and distract from actions that may reduce sales

While the tobacco industry has been stepping up its efforts in Australia, federal investment in antismoking campaigns has declined from a frequency of 3666 target audience rating points (TARPs) in 2011, and 2500 on average for 2010–2012, to an average of just 441 TARPs per year in the past 3 years. Strong, sustained, mass media campaigns that achieve over 4800 TARPs per year are a critical complement to tax increases as an evidence-based approach to reducing smoking prevalence,(here, here, here and here), including among people in vulnerable and lower socio-economic groups where smokers are concentrated. The absence of sufficient strong public education over the past 3 years has deprived the nation of the momentum needed to ensure continuing impact for tax increases and plain packaging, and to counter the tobacco industry’s price-based, reassurance-based and other distraction marketing strategies. Governments need to restore spending on public education campaigns, which is now worryingly below the levels required.

Run effective, sustained, adequately funded mass media campaigns, while also providing extra support for vulnerable populations.

Introduce new legislation to enable regulation of the product itself, to require comprehensive and easily comprehended warnings about the product to consumers and to outlaw all features, names and implicit claims likely to falsely reassure smokers or make products more attractive to children.

Amend plain packaging legislation to standardise the number of cigarettes in a pack and the amount of RYO tobacco in pouches and establish a minimum RYO pack size no smaller than 30 g.

Encourage all governments to ban the promotion of tobacco products on price boards at point of sale, and end perks to retailers.

Amend excise and customs legislation to equalise the tax on RYO tobacco with that on cigarettes.

Ensure compliance across all areas of government of Article 5.3 of the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which requires comprehensive effort to protect tobacco control measures from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.

Assess the feasibility of requiring manufacturers and importers to affix Government-issued “tax paid” stamps with covert security markings (enabling tax agencies to determine if these were faked) to all tobacco products dutied for sale in Australia. Improve surveillance of retailers to ensure that no untaxed products are being sold.

Require tobacco wholesalers to report in detail on sales of each category of tobacco product sold in each primary health care network in the country so that progress can be monitored and appropriate corrective action taken quickly if new problems emerge.

Ban political donations from tobacco companies and require tobacco companies to publish details of their lobbying, marketing and public relations activities.

Professor Mike Daube, AO, is professor of Health Policy at Curtin University. Todd Harper is the chief executive officer of Cancer Council Victoria.

The authors thank Dr. Michelle Scollo of the Cancer Council Victoria and Professor Melanie Wakefield of the Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer at the Cancer Council Victoria for their technical support.

To find a doctor, or a job, to use GP Desktop and Doctors Health, book and track your CPD, and buy textbooks and guidelines, visit doctorportal.

4 thoughts on “Exposing the hydra of Big Tobacco”

Me Daube and Mr Harper. This is truly becoming behind the times lobbying. Most of the measures you’ve outlined would have sufficed or would have been somewhat effective 4+ years ago, but it would seem even after all this time, tobacco companies are still “ahead of the pack” on multiple fronts including; Promotional strategies, short and long term products pipelines and reimagining the distribution network for the future.
I have worked for one of these monsters for many years (not anymore!), I’ve been there for some of the largest reforms, and while some measures the government have passed into law have been annoying for the most part it’s business as usual.
Anti tobacco lobbyists should be serious, measures such as set pack prices, increased taxes, banning promotional spend, banning all internal marketing & incentives to the trade as well as getting on the front foot with regard to the new wave of products like Blu & IQos will ensure this industry will stay in obscurity where it belongs.

Great article Mike. I would have added 10. Increase funding of popular movies, bands and music videos to circumvent tobacco promotion restrictions on other media. A real tragedy to see media campaigns slowed down just as they were achieving real traction in reducing prevalence.

Why not do a similar article on sugar and food companies?
This is arguably more harmful than tobacco, with far more wide-reaching consequences. After all, not many babies, toddlers and children smoke, but they are all given food containing far too much sugar/carbohydrates, in line with the current guidelines on what constitutes a healthy diet.

As long as the government stands to reap large amounts in tax and excise, one wonders just how seriously they take slaughtering the golden goose. A similar claim could be made for alcohol and sugar. While we all seem to think that longer term costs of illnesses related to these products outweigh the short-term gains in tax revenue, it is in the short term that the pain of revenue loss will be felt, while the gains in decreased health care expenditure will take a generation.